Autopsy Not quite enough. Pies fall 105-77 - Rd 19, 2018

[Gone Critical]

Gone Critical, CFC2010 , jmac70 , ipswichpies

Re: the argument 2017 v 2018:

I'll partly agree with you here GC in our best performances of last year. Our best performances last year are our consistent good performances this year. One thing that stands out from all of your posts in the debate is that it seems the argument is results based rather than the game style and consistency.

There is no doubt that our best last year is Nathans "vision" and very similar to our "good" this year, we can all see the system has been achieved on a regular basis. It is the why that no one has mentioned. You can see that for the previous 4 years what we see now is what Nathan has being trying to achieve. Why have we reached consistent desired game style?

Well I won't go into detail but certainly DE is a big factor particularly in the phone box and probably the bonus factor has been speed on the link up. For mine it's clear that this is the way that Nathan has wanted to play since the succession plan. Hence bringing in speed like Murray and Stephenson and the panel change up with Buddha and Longmuir working on the DE and coalface work.

GC with all due respect I read your posts as slightly pessimistic, your theories are sound but counter arguments to those are also. Certainly Nathan believes there is still big improvement in the group - says so in every presser. Sure you'll say all coaches say that but I'm certain he (and the panel and the playing group) really believe it.

Is our best last year better? That's hard to quantify given you have to take into account how have the oppo we've played progressed or regressed. What is clear is that our system is not personnel reliant, certainly not as much as say a transition team like WC.

I really like your post, it opens up a lot of discussion. I can understand your "pessimistic" view of my post. I feel a bit cautious in what I am posting so maybe would chuck that in as a better description. I have no doubt we have improved this year what I am questioning if anything is the feeling of how much.

Think Pies are a sexy story this season so there is a lot of hype around us and that can sometimes make performance seem better than it is. I just dont think we have elevated ourselves above the teams around 5-10 on the ladder clearly. Thats our performance level at the moment. I would have Rich, WCE, PA, GWS and Geel as the best teams this season and we are near the head of the pack in the next group. Offer that at the start of the season and we grab it.

Maybe I am being too results driven but I think there is danger in reading too much into gamestyles v lesser sides where your systems will tend to look at their best. So far those systems haven't held up against the better sides. One other thing I would add is our performances against Rich have looked good but NM and Saints have also had very similar matches v the Tigers. When you have a 8 page pre match HUN spread and 88000 at the G on a beautiful Sat afternoon lots will be spoken about that match. NM v Rich with 29000 on a Sun arvo at Etihad with 4 points diff at 3/4 time and a 10 point margin at the end is a very similar story but NM got nowhere near the cred for that than we did. Not as sexy a story and less clicks.

 

[Gone Critical]

You analysis is very good Carrinbush2010.

What I will add is I think the catalyst for our consistent season this year happened in round 2.
When Moore did his hammy Bucks was "forced" to go small by the end of the game.
Out forward line against the Hawks and all through 2017 was a dogs breakfast IMO.

I would love to know how many goals WHE or Stephenson or De Goey etc have scored within 15 metres from goal?

The improvement may also be due to more effective transition but I just think our forward is functioning so much better.
In 2017 we had no problem getting the ball in there......our issue was putting it through the big sticks.
Doesn't help when you had a clogged up forward line as we did in 2017.

I agree with sideswipe the 2018 would beat the 2017 by at least 5 goals ...….I have no doubt about that.

I think the forward line improvement is the big change of 2018. I was concerned that at the start of the year Elliott and Fas were the only players we could really reliably hope would get past 30 and hopefully 40+ goals for the season. WHE and De Goey you hoped would come on and Stevo and Thomas were not even on the map. What those 4 have done has transformed us. Yes the delivery etc has been better but they, esp Thomas, have been revelations. Cox to me has been a pass but I was a long term fan. Had expectations that his contested marking would go to another level in the AFL season but would like to see more goals. He has been great for structure but would expect more from him going forward.

I agree we are better in 2018 v 2017 but the 2017 best performances havent yet been matched if that makes sense. Hopefully Syd and PA are where that happens.

 

[Chrispiesssss]

Ps : to anyone who watched my video, I have been reported by the AFL for copyright.

 

[Gone Critical]

I think they are with our injuries but not so sure they are if we had a fully fit list. Elliott, Dunn, Treloar, Aish, Reid, Degoey, Goldsack are all seasoned players and likely able to put in a 4 qtr performance. We succumbed to 10 minute burst in the last quarter while down 2 men, I don't think they are that far in front as many are saying very fortunate the 3 chasing clubs (pies WC and GWS all have had very poor injury runs) imo.

Agree they are not a super unbeatable team but they are pretty impressive. Even in the 1st Q on Saturday when we had all 22 out there we were chasing to hold on and you had that feeling all day. Would be great to see what we would do with a full list but going forward into 2019 the only missing players who are really likely to make a difference are De G, Treloar and hopefully Elliott. A bit of fire power there.

 

[CFC2010]

Ps : to anyone who watched my video, I have been reported by the AFL for copyright.

Tell them to get a life...….and leave the f kn rules alone.

 

[sideswipe]

No it’s not. A juggled mark isn’t the player propelling the ball forward, it’s a player trying to gain possession. He’s not in possession in the first place.
The idea that dropping the ball on to your foot could constitute a throw is also ludicrous. Once again, you’re not propelling the ball forward or upward, you’re dropping it straight down.

By your logic, a player could throw the ball over a player, then run around them and grab the ball and it’s not a throw because they ‘weren't attempting to dispose’ the ball. The only thing flawed here is your horrid logic.

Interestingly Pie eyed , when formulating the definition of throw, the AFL (consciously or unconsciously) relied on the notion first raised by US Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart in 1964 when he tried to explain hard core pornography or what is "obscene" by saying that "I won't attempt to define it, but I know it when I see it".

Similarly the AFL decided to define throw by saying that it has it's ordinary meaning, but also includes propelling the ball with one or two hands with a scooping motion. I have argued that the the use of "but also" should be replaced with "and includes", but no one will listen. "But" should be used when excluding, not including.

Note there is nothing in the rule about propelling "forward or upward" - you can propel it any which way, which includes dropping it. That is the "baaaaaall" we call out when the ball comes free in a tackle. It is technically a "throw" under the rules.

When in doubt remember, Justice Stewart and obscenity.

 

[loki04]

Agree they are not a super unbeatable team but they are pretty impressive. Even in the 1st Q on Saturday when we had all 22 out there we were chasing to hold on and you had that feeling all day. Would be great to see what we would do with a full list but going forward into 2019 the only missing players who are really likely to make a difference are De G, Treloar and hopefully Elliott. A bit of fire power there.

Yep they are a very good team with a game plan that's suits their best 22 to a T and also happens to counter in close hot potatoe handball happy teams, of which we employed in the first quarter.
It feeds into their pressure game, need to have receivers out wider to spread them, kick and retain more which we did more of in the following quarters.

We played poorly vs them in the first due to our tactics helping them implement their pressure style.

 

[Anzacday]

Ps : to anyone who watched my video, I have been reported by the AFL for copyright.

At least they're aware of it

 

[Gone Critical]

Ps : to anyone who watched my video, I have been reported by the AFL for copyright.

That's rugged. Surely they have better things to do.

 

[Chrispiesssss]

Come at me Gil

Tell them to get a life...….and leave the f kn rules alone.

At least they're aware of it

That's rugged. Surely they have better things to do.

 

[DuckToaster]

Ps : to anyone who watched my video, I have been reported by the AFL for copyright.

reupload it to vimeo/dailymotion

 

[Pie eyed]

No it’s not. A juggled mark isn’t the player propelling the ball forward, it’s a player trying to gain possession. He’s not in possession in the first place.
The idea that dropping the ball on to your foot could constitute a throw is also ludicrous. Once again, you’re not propelling the ball forward or upward, you’re dropping it straight down.

By your logic, a player could throw the ball over a player, then run around them and grab the ball and it’s not a throw because they ‘weren't attempting to dispose’ the ball. The only thing flawed here is your horrid logic.

Seriously! Are you an idiot?
A juggled mark where the ball does travel forward is propelling the ball forward. For gods sake just admit your post was load of tripe.
Dropping the ball onto your foot while running forward is propelling the ball forward.
For gods sake just admit your premise was load of tripe.
In the case at issue the player was also not in possession......or do your conditions only apply where they support your opinion?

Idiotic discussion.

 

[Apex36]

[

Seriously! Are you an idiot?

That’s a bit rich given you can’t seem to differentiate between situations where a player has possession of the ball and doesn’t.

A juggled mark where the ball does travel forward is propelling the ball forward. For gods sake just admit your post was load of tripe.

But the player is not in possession of the ball. A juggled mark is exactly the same as a tap or paddle. Not sure why it’s so hard to understand. The only thing tripe here is your reasoning.

Dropping the ball onto your foot while running forward is propelling the ball forward.

No, it’s dropping the ball downward whilst moving. The only thing propelling the ball forward is the players foot.

For gods sake just admit your premise was load of tripe.

Irony.

In the case at issue the player was also not in possession......or do your conditions only apply where they support your opinion?

After reading this line I literally googled the replay of the goal. He grabs the ball with both hands, keeps it in play by transferring it to his left hand, throws the ball forwards and upwards, runs around the post and kicks. I suggest you re-watch it if you think he didn’t have possession, because he absolutely did.

Idiotic discussion.

Well it is, but not for the reasons you think.

 

[Anzacday]

Think we've had enough here for a while